1917 compromise peace, the little Allied nations pay

(Trying another one of these peace ideas. Thanks for indulging me). In a situation where Germany figures out that unrestricted submarine warfare will not work and does not try it. The war plods along without USA entry. This is really a hopeless and grim situation for all involved.

a) Germany is motivated to make peace because it doesn't have a war winning idea, the blockade is really starting to hurt, the Murmansk railway is opening, so there is the threat the Russia could receive western supplies and equipment of all kinds.

b) Russia is motivated (Kerensky Russia by this time), because it is broke, its people want peace, and here there is no USA loans coming.

c) Britain and France are facing real financial difficulties without USA loans, Frances army had its mutiny, while handled, there is real doubts about ever resuming the offensive under the circumstances.

d) Austria-Hungary wants peace, just hasn't been able to figure out how to do it.

By July 1917, all the factions are willing to talk, the USA, the Dutch and the Vatican are willing to help mediate. Germany is in the power position. Its sits on occupied territory everywhere. Russia is obviously shaky, But the Allies can still resist, if only on the defense.

The hardest faction to convince is in Germany, its leadership took Germany to war, and millions are dead and gigantic treasure spent, and would have to settle for a compromise peace, it might mean revolution and the end of the monarchy. The Kaiser, with some prodding from the Crown Prince decide to be on the right side of history and strongly advocate for peace, The Kaiser offering to step down (in favor of his son) if it would help.

The USA floats the idea of Belgian Congo being used to compensate Germany in a compromise peace (happened in OTL). A conference in the Hague of all the various powers meets, war activity at the fronts minimizes.

Germany takes this USA idea and doubles down. Agrees to peace on France and Russia's pre - war boundaries, in exchange for a German favorable division of Portuguese and Belgian colonies.
(all going to Germany, except for southern Mozambique to Britain.

Luxembourg to be annexed by Germany.

Serbia, Montenegro and Albania to be divided between Italy, Bulgaria and Austria.

Romanian Dobruja is split, Southern half to Bulgaria, Northern Half is under Turkish occupation for 20 years.

Everywhere else is prewar boundaries.

The Allies keep seized German and Austrian merchants in compensation for losses and damages.

All powers agrees to a 10 year naval holiday on naval construction and limits to 50% of Britain thereafter.

Germany agrees to setup a fund for compensation of French and Belgian private property destroyed.

----------------------------------------

Would the Allies agree to such a peace under such circumstances? I think yes. Britain gets naval security, picks up a colonial acquisition, no losses, and Britain is the lead player for the Allies.

Russia has no choice

France has no choice without Britain and Russia and at least doesn't lose anything and gets her occupied territory back.

Belgium is at least liberated.

--------------------------

Opinions? Is this plausible?
 
Huh.

This is an interesting scenario. Problem is I don't think the Kaiser goes for it. Why doesn't he just say "hey, let's try out the subs and see what happens" rather than abdicate?
 
Any French government that signs this treaty will be out of power the next election if not sooner (did they have safety vests in 1917?). That's not to say it wouldn't have to if the others signed, just that things would get very bad after that.

Is America bound by the naval freeze? I can't see that getting radified given that the US was non combatant.

All in all, fairly doable. With the biggest hurdle being Kaiser Bill needing to be reasonable.
 
The Crown Prince had a pretty good idea of the odds and likely hood of things. I think if the family got together and said the monarchy might survive this, but you might have to go. Maybe we could be just King of Prussia vs King of Germany or something like that or other constitutional limitations which would certainly come.

vs.

Let the torpedoes fly and hope for a victory (thought to be thin chance in this TL, OTL the navy kinda had to stretch some numbers to make it look like it would work). But if it doesn't work. The dynasty is gone, exile or worse.
 
If unrestricted submarine warfare isn't implemented and America doesn't join the war, I don't see how Ludendorff/Hindenburg (or the Kaiser for that matter) would settle for a negotiated peace. German troops are entrenched in northern France and Belgium; a big push could reasonably take Amiens and split the Entente, this time around.

If you somehow make food shortages worse for the Central Powers, have more of the French army to mutiny and keep Russia fighting until 1918, I think a brokered peace starts looking more reasonable. I'm not sure if the United States would be the one to do it, though.

Considering the United Kingdom got into the war partially because of Belgium in the first place, I think there's zero chance that the Congo is given to Germany at all. Germany is fighting a guerrilla war in Africa at this point, remember.

I can see a tentative ceasefire taking place, with a return to 1914 borders by both factions. Millions of soldiers and thousands of civilians are dead. Talks of a permanent peace settlement would be close to impossible at this point, let alone reparations. After France, Germany and Russia deal with their revolutionaries at home, then perhaps you get a peace deal.

Nasty business.
 
Any French government that signs this treaty will be out of power the next election if not sooner (did they have safety vests in 1917?). That's not to say it wouldn't have to if the others signed, just that things would get very bad after that.

Is America bound by the naval freeze? I can't see that getting radified given that the US was non combatant.

All in all, fairly doable. With the biggest hurdle being Kaiser Bill needing to be reasonable.

America wouldn't be bound by that, unless America did it informally, America may not have to build much if the others are not. Japan is the wild card here, would she give back her colonial acquisitions to Germany???, what is her government like??? If Japan is building so will USA.

(The treaty might just have to be, Germany is 50% of Britain without particular limitations)

On the French government, yeah no Alsace Lorraine, but the army has mutinied, the USA isn't giving anymore loans, Germany is occupying much of your territory, might not have much choice, at least the French government didn't start this mess.
 
If unrestricted submarine warfare isn't implemented and America doesn't join the war, I don't see how Ludendorff/Hindenburg (or the Kaiser for that matter) would settle for a negotiated peace. German troops are entrenched in northern France and Belgium; a big push could reasonably take Amiens and split the Entente, this time around.

Kerensky Russia has to be in on the peace conference. As long as Russia is still in the war and maintaining a front. Germany can't really launch a large offensive.
 
I can see a tentative ceasefire taking place, with a return to 1914 borders by both factions. Millions of soldiers and thousands of civilians are dead.

You aren't wrong, but reading this sentence made me despair. OTL WWI was an absolute waste of lives, this version of WWI is somehow even worse in terms of lives lost for little to no gain.
 
Kerensky Russia has to be in on the peace conference. As long as Russia is still in the war and maintaining a front. Germany can't really launch a large offensive.

You're absolutely right that something the Kaiserschlacht is not doable, even without America, at this point. Still, it then becomes a matter of time until the eastern front is resolved: OTL, Riga fell on the 3rd of September, leaving the road open to Petrograd. Trotsky ran Kerensky out of Petrograd by November, and the rest is history - ceasefire with the Germans in December, Treaty of Brest-Litovsk in early 1918. You'd need the Russian army to somehow boggle Germany down until 1918, while also keeping the political situation checked.

Kerensky has very slim chances at making it to the peace conference. The February Revolution and the April + July crisis are right around the corner.
 
The question is do the British and French see that Russia is going to collapse. As long as they see Kerensky's government as viable and Russia remaining in the war, they won't go for a peace hoping the two front war grinds Germany down, and that A-H is shakier than Russia (as they see it). If Kerensky wises up and realizes that staying in the war means complete revolution/collapse for Russia or the Bolsheviks do what they did OTL the UK and France are screwed. The UK can get off scot free in any peace, Germany has no levers to use against them. While making a peace, even one that retains status quo on borders thus ceding Alsace-Lorraine for at least another generation or two (révanche will still burn in the French soul), may cause the government that signs the document to fall, France will have no choice.

The Congo may or may not fall to Germany or be split up, I expect the colonial situation in Africa otherwise to tend to return to prewar, in the Pacific the Japanese will want to hold on to what they have grabbed in terms of islands, the German concessions in China may be returned. German territory near Australia may or not not be kept by the UK.

If Germany and A-H are fighting a one front war in 1917/18 standing in the strategic defensive in the west, and the USA is not in the war, they are in better shape to continue in than France especially. The key is being willing to accept a peace that is not too greedy, especially in the west.
 
I can't see Germany agreeing to this without some guarantee that France isn't going to want to go for a third round in 20 years.
 
Top